Libertarianism Is An Intellectually Shallow And Morally Bankrupt Philosophy

[LZ22]

[quote name='dozyproductions' date='09 February 2010 - 03:42 PM' timestamp='1265751777' post='450631']
Sorry, wrong wording.

[url="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ol3mEe8TH7w"]http://www.youtube.c...h?v=ol3mEe8TH7w[/url]




It was made by the government but it doesn't answer to anybody for the most part. The federal reserve act in 1913 was concocted by big bankers of the time while most of congress was away for holiday session.


[/quote]

If we could audit the Fed, I guarantee you the country would be literally up in arms at the information revealed.

Back to the original argument: this would be an example of government getting out of control, and the PEOPLE keeping the government in check for their own well-being. Thus, I believe that it is the PEOPLE all along who have ultimately been the cause of their own well-being. The people guide the government, not the other way around. When the government gets out of hand, the people get pissed.

[Dr. B]

up in arms? with regard to what? They help maintain a floating exchange rate (good), coordinate the federal funds rate to smooth economic fluctuation domestically (good), and negotiate macro-financial economic affairs to protect our national interest in the world markets (good). The simple fact is that individuals do not have the ability to coordinate markets when inter-bank and international lending, facets of the free market mind you, are taking place. It is an undisputed opinion amongst economists and finance-minded individuals that there exists an observable causal relationship between the autonomy of a country's central bank and how robust a nation's economy is to shocks in financial markets.

What you're asking for by suggesting the Fed. be audited is for them to begin answering to special interest groups and lobbies who control the auditing process - increasing the friction of the gears in our financial system.

I'd like to hear what you think the Fed. does that is not just.

further, regarding your last comment about the people guiding the government: Have you stopped to think that maybe, just maybe, the author of the original article was championing this type of government? Or did the blurbs about efficiency and equal representation go unnoticed? Edited February 12, 2010 by Dr. B

[Thomas Mann]

<li>[b] Political [Libertarian] Debate Strategy [/b][list][*] Count only the benefits of libertarianism, count only the costs of government.[*] Five of a factoid beats a full argument.[*] All historical examples are tainted by statism, except when they favor libertarian claims.[*] Spiritually baptize the deceased as libertarians because they cannot protest the anachronism: Locke, Smith, Paine, Jefferson, Spooner, etc.[*] The most heavily armed libertarian has the biggest dick and thus the best argument.[*] The best multi-party democratic republics should be equated to the worst dictatorships for the purposes of denouncing statism. It's only a matter of degree.[*] Inviolate private property is the only true measure of freedom. Those without property have the freedom to try to acquire it. If they can't, let them find somebody else's property to complain on.[*] Private ownership is the cure for all problems, despite the historical record of privately owned states such as Nazi Germany, Czarist and Stalinist Russia, and Maoist China.[*] Require perfection as the only applicable standard to judge government: libertarianism, being imaginary, cannot be fairly judged to have flaws.[*] Only libertarian economists' Nobel Prizes count: the other economists and Nobel Prize Committee are mistaken.[*] Any exceptional case of private production proves that government ought not to be involved[/list]http://world.std.com/~mhuben/onelesson.html

[Thomas Mann]

[b]Introduction [/b]

One of the most attractive features of libertarianism is that it is basically a very simple ideology. Maybe even simpler than Marxism, since you don't have to learn foreign words like "proletariat".

This brief outline will give you most of the tools you need to hit the ground running as a freshly indoctrinated libertarian ideologue. Go forth and proselytize!

[b] Philosophy [/b]<ul><li> In the beginning, man dwelt in a state of Nature, until the serpent Government tempted man into Initial Coercion. <li> Government is the Great Satan. All Evil comes from Government, and all Good from the Market, according to the Ayatollah Rand. <li> We must worship the Horatio Alger fantasy that the meritorious few will just happen to have the lucky breaks that make them rich. Libertarians happen to be the meritorious few by ideological correctness. The rest can go hang. <li> Government cannot own things because only individuals can own things. Except for corporations, partnerships, joint ownership, marriage, and anything else we except but government. <li> Parrot these arguments, and you too will be a singular, creative, reasoning individualist. <li> Parents cannot choose a government for their children any more than they can choose language, residence, school, or religion. <li> Taxation is theft because we have a right to squat in the US and benefit from defense, infrastructure, police, courts, etc. without obligation.

[Thomas Mann]

[b]Introduction [/b]

One of the most attractive features of libertarianism is that it is basically a very simple ideology. Maybe even simpler than Marxism, since you don't have to learn foreign words like "proletariat".

This brief outline will give you most of the tools you need to hit the ground running as a freshly indoctrinated libertarian ideologue. Go forth and proselytize!

[b] Philosophy [/b]<ul><li> In the beginning, man dwelt in a state of Nature, until the serpent Government tempted man into Initial Coercion. <li> Government is the Great Satan. All Evil comes from Government, and all Good from the Market, according to the Ayatollah Rand. <li> We must worship the Horatio Alger fantasy that the meritorious few will just happen to have the lucky breaks that make them rich. Libertarians happen to be the meritorious few by ideological correctness. The rest can go hang. <li> Government cannot own things because only individuals can own things. Except for corporations, partnerships, joint ownership, marriage, and anything else we except but government. <li> Parrot these arguments, and you too will be a singular, creative, reasoning individualist. <li> Parents cannot choose a government for their children any more than they can choose language, residence, school, or religion. <li> Taxation is theft because we have a right to squat in the US and benefit from defense, infrastructure, police, courts, etc. without obligation.

[Thomas Mann]

<li>[b] Government [/b][list][*] Libertarians invented outrage over government waste, bureaucracy, injustice, etc. Nobody else thinks they are bad, knows they exist, or works to stop them.[*] Enlightenment comes only through repetition of the sacred mantra "Government does not work" according to Guru Browne.[*] Only government is force, no matter how many Indians were killed by settlers to acquire their property, no matter how many blacks were enslaved and sold by private companies, no matter how many heads of union members are broken by private police.[*] Money that government touches spontaneously combusts, destroying the economy. Money retained by individuals grows the economy, even if literally burnt.[*] Private education works, public education doesn't. The publicly educated masses that have grown the modern economies of the past 150 years are an illusion.[*] Market failures, trusts, and oligopolies are lies spread by the evil economists serving the government as described in the "Protocols of the Elders of Statism".[*] Central planning cannot work. Which is why all businesses internally are run like little markets, with no centralized leadership.[*] Paternalism is the worst thing that can be inflicted upon people, as everyone knows that fathers are the most hated and reviled figures in the world.[*] Government is like fire, a dangerous servant and a fearsome master. Therefore, we should avoid it entirely, as we do all forms of combustion.[/list]

[Thomas Mann]

<li>[b] Regulation [/b][list][*] The FDA is solely responsible for any death or sickness where it might have prevented treatment by the latest unproven fad.[*] Children, criminals, death cultists, and you all have the same inalienable right to own any weaponry: conventional, chemical, biological, or nuclear.[*] All food, drugs, and medical treatments should be entirely unregulated: every industry should be able to kill 300,000 per year in the US like the tobacco industry.[*] If you don't have a gun, you are not a libertarian. If you do have a gun, why don't you have even more powerful armament?[*] Better to abolish all regulations, consider everything as property, and solve all controversy by civil lawsuit over damages. The US doesn't have enough lawyers, and people who can't afford to invest many thousands of dollars in lawsuits should shut up.[/list]

[Thomas Mann]

<li>[b] Libertarian Party [/b][list][*] The Libertarian Party is well on its way to dominating the political landscape, judging from its power base of 100+ elected dogcatchers and other important officials after 25 years of effort.[*] The "Party of Oxymoron": "Individualists unite!"[*] Flip answers are more powerful than the best reasoned arguments, which is why so many libertarians are in important government positions.[*] It's time the new pro-freedom libertarian platform was implemented; child labor, orphanages, sweatshops, poorhouses, company towns, monopolies, trusts, cartels, blacklists, private goons, slumlords, etc.[*] Libertarianism "rules" Internet political debate the same way US Communism "ruled" pamphleteering.[*] No compromise from the "Party of Principle". Justice, happiness, liberty, guns, and other good stuff come only from rigidly adhering to inflexible dogmas.[*] Minimal government is whatever we say it is, and we don't agree.[*] Government is "moving steadily in a libertarian direction" with every change libertarians approve of; no matter if it takes one step forward and two steps backwards.[*] Yes, the symbol of the Libertarian Party is a Big Government Statue. It's not supposed to be funny or ironic![/list]

[Thomas Mann]

[quote name='LZ22' date='31 January 2010 - 06:46 PM' timestamp='1264988812' post='448786']
[quote name='Dr. B' date='30 January 2010 - 02:58 PM' timestamp='1264885137' post='448588']
[quote name='johnp' date='29 January 2010 - 11:10 PM' timestamp='1264828241' post='448500']
It seems the article begins with some misconceptions and then proceeds to build on these; so essentially the value of the article's applicability is nil.
Much as if, I were to describe people who enjoy hookahs as generally being aficionados of drug culture or perhaps desired ties to radical terror groups, who also have members who smoke hookah-then built an argument about why hookah should be banned or monitored based on these [false] assumptions.
[/quote]

misconceptions such as?
[/quote]

I believe johnp is referring what I mentioned in my first comment about how correlation does not equate to causation. Thus, just because the rise of more government and the rise of the peoples well being are positively correlated, does not mean the government is the reason for the rise in well-being. Thats like me saying the pollution in the atmosphere increases positively with greater well-being with people, thus pollution is the reason why more people live better. Its slightly flawed.


And as for your second response, ya sorry I got very political with that one ha
[/quote]

Correlation does not equal causation, yet government increasing in size correlates with failed economies, poor education, and nearly every perceived ill of society.

[Thomas Mann]

[quote name='Thomas Mann' date='21 March 2010 - 06:00 AM' timestamp='1269176454' post='458567']
[quote name='LZ22' date='31 January 2010 - 06:46 PM' timestamp='1264988812' post='448786']
[quote name='Dr. B' date='30 January 2010 - 02:58 PM' timestamp='1264885137' post='448588']
[quote name='johnp' date='29 January 2010 - 11:10 PM' timestamp='1264828241' post='448500']
It seems the article begins with some misconceptions and then proceeds to build on these; so essentially the value of the article's applicability is nil.
Much as if, I were to describe people who enjoy hookahs as generally being aficionados of drug culture or perhaps desired ties to radical terror groups, who also have members who smoke hookah-then built an argument about why hookah should be banned or monitored based on these [false] assumptions.
[/quote]

misconceptions such as?
[/quote]

I believe johnp is referring what I mentioned in my first comment about how correlation does not equate to causation. Thus, just because the rise of more government and the rise of the peoples well being are positively correlated, does not mean the government is the reason for the rise in well-being. Thats like me saying the pollution in the atmosphere increases positively with greater well-being with people, thus pollution is the reason why more people live better. Its slightly flawed.


And as for your second response, ya sorry I got very political with that one ha
[/quote]

Correlation does not equal causation, yet government increasing in size correlates with failed economies, poor education, and nearly every perceived ill of society.
[/quote]
Correlation does not equal causation, yet government increasing in size correlates and is the causation of failed economies, poor education, and nearly every perceived ill of society.

[Thomas Mann]

[quote name='Venger' date='02 February 2010 - 01:28 PM' timestamp='1265142486' post='449213']
[quote name='jaytoo3' date='02 February 2010 - 03:04 PM' timestamp='1265141087' post='449208']
I think us not educating ourselves and letting the government handle everything is the issue. The fact that our closest contact with Gov officials is a letter, email or phone without citing law is hurting us, we can't hear the buffalo coming if we don't have our ear to the ground on this one.
[/quote]
And this is where the problem lies. Socialism is popular not because of how well it work but because people are willing to give up individual rights to "feel" safe. If you know you will never be hungry, the police will always protect you (army as well) and Big government is going to make sure no one screws you over,you feel safe. But at what cost? What are you going to have to give up so someone else feels safe. Does the government have the right to tell you that your are too good at what you do and this guy is too lazy to work so you give him some of your stuff?
Some say the government is responsible to redistribute wealth because they see a needs and if we won't give voluntarily they will take it from us. I for one have been and will continue to be very generous to people in need but I decided who to help. A family out of work in my church among others. I do not feel like I should be picking up the tab on a baby factory who has figured out babies mean bigger check.
Ray
[/quote]

If charities work so well, why haven't they worked so well to fill the vacuum left behind from the government?

[Thomas Mann]

[quote name='Venger' date='04 February 2010 - 05:56 AM' timestamp='1265288204' post='449655']
[quote name='Dr. B' date='03 February 2010 - 02:53 AM' timestamp='1265183626' post='449385']
I think the last few posts have defined socialism inaccurately - at least in its most simple and just form. Yall may be referring to Marxism, or rather Karl Marx's suggestion for implementing communal socialism, rather than the theory of socialism per se.

I'm just kind of stoking the fire in this thread instead of being as actively involved as I typically am; but for the purpose of having you all express your sentiments surrounding the acceptance of (efficient) government as a positive social force.

Carry on
[/quote]
I think I have a pretty good handle on what socialism is. When I make 250,000 the government taxes me 36% of that income. They then give that income to a women in NYC who has 4 babies with 4 different babies daddies, That is a pretty good explanation of redistributing of wealth.
Socialism also dictates how my son is educated regardless of my personal or religious views. Socialism tells me it ok to smoke in my house but not where I work...for the greater good. Socialism give government more power that the people who put it there in the first place. Socialism allows blackwater mercenaries the right to take the guns of law abiding citizens in new Orleans because they MIGHT hurt someone,leaving them unprotected form those that did not give up their illegal gun. I have more examples if needed.
Ray
[/quote]
You can send your child to private school. Every system can be abused, but not everyone abuses it. Yes there are bad and good aspects of your idea of socialism. Let's take your views to its logical conclusion shall we? Abolish public schools. If you can't afford schooling tough luck. If you have a baby then lose your job, your baby should die of starvation. If smoking were aloud in the workplace by the gov't, it's likely your employer won't allow you smoke in your office (I personally am agnostic with regard to the smoking ban). What's your optimum "power meter" for the government? Yes, socialism told the blackwater mercenaries to take the guyns of law abiding citizens away and anytime something bad happens because of the gov't it's all socialism fault. Socialism is a bad bad boy. Since gov't = socialism, and gov't = flawed, then no gov't = no flaws. I love your perfect logic.

[Venger]

[quote name='Thomas Mann' date='21 March 2010 - 09:14 AM' timestamp='1269177245' post='458570']
[quote name='Venger' date='04 February 2010 - 05:56 AM' timestamp='1265288204' post='449655']
[quote name='Dr. B' date='03 February 2010 - 02:53 AM' timestamp='1265183626' post='449385']
I think the last few posts have defined socialism inaccurately - at least in its most simple and just form. Yall may be referring to Marxism, or rather Karl Marx's suggestion for implementing communal socialism, rather than the theory of socialism per se.

I'm just kind of stoking the fire in this thread instead of being as actively involved as I typically am; but for the purpose of having you all express your sentiments surrounding the acceptance of (efficient) government as a positive social force.

Carry on
[/quote]
I think I have a pretty good handle on what socialism is. When I make 250,000 the government taxes me 36% of that income. They then give that income to a women in NYC who has 4 babies with 4 different babies daddies, That is a pretty good explanation of redistributing of wealth.
Socialism also dictates how my son is educated regardless of my personal or religious views. Socialism tells me it ok to smoke in my house but not where I work...for the greater good. Socialism give government more power that the people who put it there in the first place. Socialism allows blackwater mercenaries the right to take the guns of law abiding citizens in new Orleans because they MIGHT hurt someone,leaving them unprotected form those that did not give up their illegal gun. I have more examples if needed.
Ray
[/quote]
You can send your child to private school. Every system can be abused, but not everyone abuses it. Yes there are bad and good aspects of your idea of socialism. Let's take your views to its logical conclusion shall we? Abolish public schools. If you can't afford schooling tough luck. If you have a baby then lose your job, your baby should die of starvation. If smoking were aloud in the workplace by the gov't, it's likely your employer won't allow you smoke in your office (I personally am agnostic with regard to the smoking ban). What's your optimum "power meter" for the government? Yes, socialism told the blackwater mercenaries to take the guyns of law abiding citizens away and anytime something bad happens because of the gov't it's all socialism fault. Socialism is a bad bad boy. Since gov't = socialism, and gov't = flawed, then no gov't = no flaws. I love your perfect logic.
[/quote]
now hold on there cowboy. I never said no government. The fed has a purpose via the constitution. The Fed is in charge of things like the army in regard to foreign wars. They should not be be dictating policy that should be handled at a state level. you have not answered the most simple question that most libertarians ask...WHO IS GOING TO PAY FOR IT?
Ray

[Thomas Mann]

[quote name='Venger' date='21 March 2010 - 06:58 AM' timestamp='1269179934' post='458573']
[quote name='Thomas Mann' date='21 March 2010 - 09:14 AM' timestamp='1269177245' post='458570']
[quote name='Venger' date='04 February 2010 - 05:56 AM' timestamp='1265288204' post='449655']
[quote name='Dr. B' date='03 February 2010 - 02:53 AM' timestamp='1265183626' post='449385']
I think the last few posts have defined socialism inaccurately - at least in its most simple and just form. Yall may be referring to Marxism, or rather Karl Marx's suggestion for implementing communal socialism, rather than the theory of socialism per se.

I'm just kind of stoking the fire in this thread instead of being as actively involved as I typically am; but for the purpose of having you all express your sentiments surrounding the acceptance of (efficient) government as a positive social force.

Carry on
[/quote]
I think I have a pretty good handle on what socialism is. When I make 250,000 the government taxes me 36% of that income. They then give that income to a women in NYC who has 4 babies with 4 different babies daddies, That is a pretty good explanation of redistributing of wealth.
Socialism also dictates how my son is educated regardless of my personal or religious views. Socialism tells me it ok to smoke in my house but not where I work...for the greater good. Socialism give government more power that the people who put it there in the first place. Socialism allows blackwater mercenaries the right to take the guns of law abiding citizens in new Orleans because they MIGHT hurt someone,leaving them unprotected form those that did not give up their illegal gun. I have more examples if needed.
Ray
[/quote]
You can send your child to private school. Every system can be abused, but not everyone abuses it. Yes there are bad and good aspects of your idea of socialism. Let's take your views to its logical conclusion shall we? Abolish public schools. If you can't afford schooling tough luck. If you have a baby then lose your job, your baby should die of starvation. If smoking were aloud in the workplace by the gov't, it's likely your employer won't allow you smoke in your office (I personally am agnostic with regard to the smoking ban). What's your optimum "power meter" for the government? Yes, socialism told the blackwater mercenaries to take the guyns of law abiding citizens away and anytime something bad happens because of the gov't it's all socialism fault. Socialism is a bad bad boy. Since gov't = socialism, and gov't = flawed, then no gov't = no flaws. I love your perfect logic.
[/quote]
now hold on there cowboy. I never said no government. The fed has a purpose via the constitution. The Fed is in charge of things like the army in regard to foreign wars. They should not be be dictating policy that should be handled at a state level. you have not answered the most simple question that most libertarians ask...WHO IS GOING TO PAY FOR IT?
Ray
[/quote]

We are paying for it. Yes there is waste and more efficiency can be had, but to claim that the government is socialist because of the way public school is run, they disallow smoking in certain areas, it gives itself more power, allows blackwater mercenaries the right to take guns away from citizens, etc, you are equating government with being inherently flawed. and since you equate government with socialism, no gov't = no flaws. The government isn't perfect. But to blame the imperfect of government on socialism and to claim your view of libertarianism will fix the problem nullifies the issue because you are wanting to replace a compartmentalized shortfalls with a whole new political structure to replace the evilness of another structure without taking into consideration the other negative and positive variables of your suggested replacement.

[Thomas Mann]

[quote name='Venger' date='21 March 2010 - 06:58 AM' timestamp='1269179934' post='458573']
[quote name='Thomas Mann' date='21 March 2010 - 09:14 AM' timestamp='1269177245' post='458570']
[quote name='Venger' date='04 February 2010 - 05:56 AM' timestamp='1265288204' post='449655']
[quote name='Dr. B' date='03 February 2010 - 02:53 AM' timestamp='1265183626' post='449385']
I think the last few posts have defined socialism inaccurately - at least in its most simple and just form. Yall may be referring to Marxism, or rather Karl Marx's suggestion for implementing communal socialism, rather than the theory of socialism per se.

I'm just kind of stoking the fire in this thread instead of being as actively involved as I typically am; but for the purpose of having you all express your sentiments surrounding the acceptance of (efficient) government as a positive social force.

Carry on
[/quote]
I think I have a pretty good handle on what socialism is. When I make 250,000 the government taxes me 36% of that income. They then give that income to a women in NYC who has 4 babies with 4 different babies daddies, That is a pretty good explanation of redistributing of wealth.
Socialism also dictates how my son is educated regardless of my personal or religious views. Socialism tells me it ok to smoke in my house but not where I work...for the greater good. Socialism give government more power that the people who put it there in the first place. Socialism allows blackwater mercenaries the right to take the guns of law abiding citizens in new Orleans because they MIGHT hurt someone,leaving them unprotected form those that did not give up their illegal gun. I have more examples if needed.
Ray
[/quote]
You can send your child to private school. Every system can be abused, but not everyone abuses it. Yes there are bad and good aspects of your idea of socialism. Let's take your views to its logical conclusion shall we? Abolish public schools. If you can't afford schooling tough luck. If you have a baby then lose your job, your baby should die of starvation. If smoking were aloud in the workplace by the gov't, it's likely your employer won't allow you smoke in your office (I personally am agnostic with regard to the smoking ban). What's your optimum "power meter" for the government? Yes, socialism told the blackwater mercenaries to take the guyns of law abiding citizens away and anytime something bad happens because of the gov't it's all socialism fault. Socialism is a bad bad boy. Since gov't = socialism, and gov't = flawed, then no gov't = no flaws. I love your perfect logic.
[/quote]
now hold on there cowboy. I never said no government. The fed has a purpose via the constitution. The Fed is in charge of things like the army in regard to foreign wars. They should not be be dictating policy that should be handled at a state level. you have not answered the most simple question that most libertarians ask...WHO IS GOING TO PAY FOR IT?
Ray
[/quote]

Also, show me what part of the constitution explicitly states that "The Fed is in charge of things like the army in regard to foreign wars. They should not be be dictating policy that should be handled at a state level".

[Venger]

http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html
read it again. I have recently. we are way off base from this document and what they are doing now.
Ray